G oogle's latest policy change allowing "fingerprinting" for online tracking has sparked criticism from privacy advocates, who accuse the tech giant of disregarding user privacy. The update, effective from Sunday, permits advertisers to gather more detailed data on users, including IP addresses and device-specific information.
Despite Google’s claims that these tracking methods are already widely used across the industry, privacy campaigners argue the move contradicts the company’s previous stance. In a 2019 blog post, Google strongly opposed fingerprinting, calling it an invasive practice that "subverts user choice and is wrong."
In a recent post explaining the change, Google justified its shift by citing evolving internet usage patterns, including the rise of smart TVs and gaming consoles, which make traditional cookie-based ad targeting less effective. The company also maintains that expanded privacy options will ultimately enhance user security.
"Privacy-enhancing technologies offer new ways for our partners to succeed on emerging platforms... without compromising on user privacy," Google stated in response to the backlash.
However, critics argue that fingerprinting and IP tracking diminish user control, making it harder for individuals to manage how their data is collected.
"By allowing fingerprinting, Google has given itself—and the advertising industry it dominates—permission to use a form of tracking that people can't do much to stop," said Martin Thomson, a distinguished engineer at Mozilla, a competing browser company.
What is Fingerprinting?
Fingerprinting is a tracking method that compiles various data points from a user's device—such as screen size, time zone, browser type, and battery level—to create a unique profile. While some of this data is necessary for websites to function correctly, when combined, it can identify individual users with high accuracy.
Previously, Google restricted the use of IP addresses for ad targeting. Unlike cookies, which users can delete or block, fingerprinting data is harder to control, making it an attractive tool for advertisers but a major privacy concern.
"By explicitly allowing a tracking technique they previously described as incompatible with user control, Google highlights its ongoing prioritization of profits over privacy," said Lena Cohen, a staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "These tracking techniques expose individuals’ sensitive data to brokers, surveillance firms, and even law enforcement agencies."
A Controversial Industry Shift
Pete Wallace, an executive at advertising technology firm GumGum, believes fingerprinting falls into a "grey area" of privacy concerns.
"Should people feel comfortable staying in a grey area of privacy? I'd say no," Wallace said.
His company specializes in contextual advertising, which targets users based on keywords on the pages they visit rather than personal data. Wallace views Google's change as a regression in the industry's movement towards consumer privacy.
"Fingerprinting feels like it's taking a much more business-centric approach rather than a consumer-centric one," he noted. "This flip-flopping is detrimental to the industry's progress toward putting user privacy first."
While targeted advertising sustains much of the internet’s free content, it often comes at the cost of user privacy. The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has also criticized fingerprinting, calling it "irresponsible" due to its potential to undermine user autonomy over personal data.
"Fingerprinting is not a fair means of tracking users because it reduces their choice and control," said ICO’s Executive Director of Regulatory Risk Stephen Almond in a blog post last December. He warned that businesses using the technique must demonstrate compliance with stringent data protection laws.
"Based on our understanding of how fingerprinting is currently used for advertising, this is a high bar to meet," Almond added.
In response, Google defended its approach, asserting that IP addresses are already commonly used across the industry and have been a tool in fraud prevention for years.
"We continue to give users the choice to receive personalized ads and will work with industry partners to encourage responsible data use," a company spokesperson stated.
Despite Google’s assurances, the debate over fingerprinting underscores the ongoing struggle between digital privacy advocates and the advertising-driven business model that fuels much of the internet.
0 Comments